1 Folse, K., and Chien, Y. (2003). Using L2 Research on Multimedia Annotations to Evaluate CALL Vocabulary Materials.

Sunshine State TESOL Journal 2, 25-37. ================================================================= Using L2 Research on Multimedia Annotations to Evaluate CALL Vocabulary Materials Keith S. Folse and Ya-chen Chien University of Central Florida Abstract Current ESL vocabulary software makes use of one or more of four types of annotations: text, audio, picture, and video. Teachers and administrators searching for quality ESL vocabulary software can use recent research findings on the efficacy of these four types of annotations. In general, evidence from L2 research shows that (1) picture annotations and video annotations should not be considered together as visual annotations but rather should be treated as two separate features; (2) the more simultaneous modes of annotation available to the learner, the better the retention (of L2 vocabulary); (3) video annotations, though certainly more complex than simple pictures, have not been shown consistently more effective than simple pictures or even text annotations; and (4) textual clues presented in L1 (i.e., translations) produce better L2 vocabulary retention than textual clues presented in the L2, at least at the lower proficiency levels and possibly at all levels. Using L2 Research on Multimedia Annotations to Evaluate CALL Vocabulary Materials The impact of computers on language learning has been positive. Using technology in the classroom motivates students, encourages them to become problem solvers, and creates new avenues for the exploration of information and knowledge (Chappelle,1990; Fox, 1998). Research has also shown that the use of various forms of computer technology results in more equal participation by all students (Warschauer, 1996), and that cooperative computer learning with explicit instructions may be more effective than individualized computer learning (Dalton, Hannafin, & Hooper, 1989). Owston, Murphy, & Wideman (1992) found that students who used computers to write their compositions made more microstructural changes than macrostructural changes (i.e., editing of specific areas) and revised their writing at all stages of the writing process. In addition, these students papers received significantly higher ratings on a holistic writing scale. Clearly, the use of computers has proven to be successful in a variety of ways in second language (L2) classes. During the last decade, ESL materials developers of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) materials have employed innovative computer technology features to produce vocabulary software programs that are quite different from the original drill-andkill products. This impressive variety of CALL software uses an array of features to teach and practice second language vocabulary, including pop-up text explanations, concordancing (Nunan, 1999), web-links (often to actual sample usages of the vocabulary in newspapers or

2 magazines), digital video, 3-D graphics, audio, photographs, speech recognition, authoring kits, and digital dictionaries. For the most part, these features explain the new vocabulary using four types of annotations alone or in various combinations, namely text annotations, audio annotation, picture annotations, and video annotations. As the cost of these features has decreased and their usability has been made easier for even novice teachers, new software products using one or more of these four features have flooded the market. Unfamiliar with many of these new features, language educators are often perplexed by the choices of software, and they are often under time constraints to determine the most efficient product to buy. Egbert (2001) points out the all too frequent problem in which the need to spend the money before it is taken away supersedes taking time for reflection about such an important and long-lasting choice (p. 22). The purpose of this article is to examine second language research on the efficacy of these four types of CALL materials annotations, namely text, audio, picture, and video, for information that can help guide educators in their selection of suitable CALL materials for their students and teachers. Evaluating CALL Vocabulary Materials A logical way to approach making an instructional software purchase decision is to conduct a needs analysis of exactly what we want our language learners to be able to do and then choose software with the features that will help our students achieve those goals. Though traditional guidelines for designing educational materials such as Blooms taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) or Gagnes seven events (Gagne, 1992) are useful, evaluation guidelines designed specifically for CALL materials may be even more helpful here. For example, Healey and Johnson (1997/1998) offer a well-designed list of questions to guide decision-makers in selecting the most appropriate CALL program for their particular teaching situation. Likewise, Gaer (1998) offers a series of questions that educators should consider in selecting software based upon an extensive list of factors, including the learners language level, the connection between the software content and the curriculum content, and the userfriendliness of the software. The use of the systematic, objective assessment criteria that these lists endeavor to provide is necessary because even subject matter experts (here, instructors) are often unable to distinguish software that is instructionally effective from that which is not. For example, Jolicoeur and Berger (1986) compared teachers evaluations of software with actual student results. The teachers evaluated four programs on fractions and four programs on spelling. Student learning after using these eight programs was measured through a pre-test, an immediate post-test, and a delayed post-test. Results showed that the teachers evaluations of the instructional effectiveness of the software differed significantly from the effectiveness as measured by student results. In fact, with the programs for improving student spelling skills, the most effective spelling program received the lowest teacher rating while the least effective spelling program was highly rated by the teachers. Much of the early CALL software in ESL practiced grammar. While grammar is important in learning any language, most second language learners see the acquisition of vocabulary as their greatest source of problems (Clipperton, 1994; Meara, 1980). For example, in surveys of ESL students in intensive academic programs (Flaitz, 1998; Henrichsen as cited in James, 1996; James, 1996), students expressed a strong desire for vocabulary instruction. In a replication of the Henrichsen study, Tan (as cited in James, 1996) found that students ranked vocabulary development second only to opportunities to speak in class. The language teaching profession has come to understand that focusing on grammar is not the most efficient way to achieve communicative competence, and the current

3 thinking is that a more integrated approach with systematic attention to the acquisition of both grammar and vocabulary is considered much more effective (Groot, 2000). Though CALL materials deal with all aspects of second language learning, including pronunciation, reading, grammar, vocabulary, composition, spelling, test preparation (e.g., TOEFL), and listening, CALL research has tended to focus primarily on vocabulary, with a great deal of attention devoted to the effectiveness of multimedia annotations on reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition (Al-Seghayer, 2001; Chun & Plass, 1996a, 1996b, 1997). Vocabulary has been a likely candidate for CALL research for several reasons. Compared to experimental studies of pronunciation or grammar learning, it is easier to show growth in vocabulary items because researchers can more easily measure pre- and post-knowledge and therefore improvement. A grammar lesson or a pronunciation lesson would not focus on ten grammar points or ten sounds, but a vocabulary lesson could easily focus on ten individual vocabulary words. Thus, it may be easier to show that students did not know but then learned single items of vocabulary more easily than is the case with items such as pronunciation or grammar that are larger and integrated within a system. In addition, CALL programs can provide and keep track of repetition of new vocabulary (i.e., frequency), an aspect that L2 vocabulary research (Folse, 1999; Nation, 2001) has shown to be important in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Research Results on the Effectiveness of Annotations in Vocabulary Programs While research indicates a positive impact of computer technology on L2 learning, it is important to consider more specific research on the effect of the four types of annotations now prevalent in vocabulary programs, namely text, audio, picture, and video. Because vocabulary software programs use one or more of these annotations in explaining all target vocabulary, the success of the learning experience with these programs depends on the efficacy of the annotations. The fact that designers have been able to combine text, audio, picture, and video annotations to enhance the content of language learning courses has been seen as a great advance in language learning. Having more features available seems intuitively better pedagogically, but what do research results tell us about which feature or combination of features is most effective? Is one of these four more effective than the other three? Is there perhaps an optimal combination of these annotations that produces better language learning? Defining the Four Modes of Annotation There are four different modes of multimedia annotation that are commonly used in ESL vocabulary software. These four features are text annotation, audio annotation, still picture annotation, and video annotation. Text Annotations Text annotations offer information in the form of words without any pictorial or audio clues and appear in one of two forms. They may appear as marginal vocabulary glossaries that provide definitions of a vocabulary entry in L1 or L2 or in the more structured format of a computerized dictionary. For example, in a reading passage, students may click on a word and view a pop-up explaining the unknown word. Audio Annotations Audio annotations are usually spoken text, preferably using the voice of a native speaker. When the student clicks on a certain word or phrase, both the word and its definition might be read aloud. Other possibilities include additional information about the meaning or usage of the word or even a sample phrase or sentence with the word. Picture Annotations Picture annotations are usually intended to clarify descriptions or to depict ambiguous or unfamiliar words. In many of the popular ESL dictionary programs, clicking

4 on a word brings up an annotation with an illustration that shows the item or the meaning of the item. Video Annotations Video annotations are digitized video or animations. They can be used to depict ambiguous or unfamiliar words, particularly verbs, or to demonstrate the content of passages from a story. Many CALL programs that use video annotations feature professional actors and are presented in Quicktime movies or 3-D graphics. Research Results for the Four Modes of Annotation Research has examined how various combinations of the four annotation modes of text, audio, picture, and video impact second language vocabulary acquisition. Research on text annotations, the only annotation studied by itself, has dealt with direct versus indirect information regarding the new vocabulary as well as the use of native language versus second language in defining the new vocabulary. Research has also compared learning from text annotations versus picture annotations versus both text + picture annotations. Finally, research has examined learning from text annotations versus a combination of text + picture annotations versus a combination of text + video annotations. Perhaps reflecting a primary focus on or even bias toward visual learning, very little research has included audio annotations. Text Annotations Perhaps because text annotations were the first multimedia applications in ESL, this feature has been researched more than the other three annotation types. One important question regarding text annotations that is of great interest to CALL designers and teachers alike is whether the meanings should be given directly or whether they should have to be inferred from a context. While research using traditional print format (e.g., textbooks) has shown that learners can infer correct meanings of unknown words when given adequate contextual clues (Hulstijn, 1993), many studies have shown that learners often infer an incorrect meaning (Hulstijn, 1992, Laufer & Sim, 1985). Explaining why guessing in context even guessing correctlydoes not lead to vocabulary learning, Grace (1998) concludes that it is important for learners to be assured that their guesses are correct while they are guessing the meaning of the words. A second question is whether the meanings, when given, should be in the target language (L2) or in the first language (L1). Several studies (Hulstijn, 1992; Hulstijn, Hollander, & Greidnaus, 1996; Watanabe, 1997) using traditional print format found that providing L1 clues to unknown vocabulary items resulted in greater retention of new vocabulary items than L2 clues did. Results from these non-CALL studies are supported by CALL research findings (Grace, 1998; Hulstijn, 1992; Laufer & Shmueli, 1997) that have also shown that text clues given in the L1 result in better vocabulary retention than text clues given in the L2. This would appear to be true for all levels, not just beginners. For example, the participants in Laufer & Shmuelis study (1997) were high school students, not beginners. Furthermore, research on L2 dictionary use shows that nonnative speakers, even advanced ones, including teachers themselves, prefer bilingual dictionaries when they use dictionaries for their own purposes, not with their students in class (personal correspondence, B. Laufer, January 9, 2003). Text versus Picture versus Text + Picture Using data from American university students studying second-semester German, Kost, Foss, & Lenzini (1999) examined the effectiveness of a combination of pictures and L1 translation in three annotation conditions: English translation (L1), picture, and English translation and picture. The researchers found that the third condition, English translation and picture, produced the best results. The authors conclude that the combination of two

5 different types of information may have allowed the students to store new information in two different storage systemsverbal and non-verbaland that this dual coding (Paivio, 1986) of the input helps increase the readers number of retrieval options. A study conducted by Yoshii (2000) with ESL learners also yielded similar results. In Yoshii's study, a between-subjects design was employed. One hundred and fifty-one adult ESL students were divided into three groups: text annotation only, picture annotation only, and text annotation combined with picture annotation. Participants were asked to read a story using the Internet. Target words in the story were annotated. Two post-tests were administered: an immediate test and a delayed test. Picture recognition, word recognition, and definition-supply were evaluated through the post-tests. The results indicated that the combination group (annotations with picture + text) performed best among the three in both the immediate test and delayed test, indicating that the combination annotation was the most effective of the three types. Interestingly, the differences among the types in the delayed test were slightly smaller than those for the immediate test. Text versus Text + Picture versus Text + Video Al-Seghayer (2001) conducted studies on the effectiveness of multimedia annotation modes on vocabulary acquisition. There were a total of 30 ESL intermediate level students involved with TOEFL scores ranging from 450 to 500. A within-subjects design was used; therefore, all participants had full access to the same version of the program. The participants were introduced to an interactive multimedia computer program designed by the researcher. The content of this program was based on a 1,300-word narrative passage from Mundahl. In the passage, target words were annotated in different modes: text, graphics, video, and sound. The target words were controlled for frequency, grammatical category, and concrete or abstract concept. The participants were asked to read the story, take a vocabulary test, fill out a questionnaire, and take part in a short interview. The vocabulary test was divided into two parts: retention and production. The retention test was presented in multiple-choice format with four alternatives. In the production test, students were asked to define, in English, six selected words that were annotated in the story. Text with video, text with still picture, and text only were assessed for their effect on vocabulary retention. The results showed that text definition coupled with video clips produced the best results among the three, and text only was the least effective mode among the three. Al-Seghayer (2001) explained that the dynamic stimuli (as opposed to the still pictures) are more easily remembered and are more effective in helping learners easily build mental depictions. Another explanation points to the redundancy hypothesis that students received twice the information when text was coupled with video. The richness in context and the authenticity that video provides make the information both more meaningful and more memorable (Sherwood, Kinzer, Hasselbring, & Brandsford, 1987). Similar research conducted earlier by Chun and Plass (1996a) yielded contrary results. This earlier research measured the effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition and the relationship between look-up behaviors and performance on vocabulary tests. Three studies were done with a total of 160 university students studying German. In all three studies, a within-subjects design was employed. The participants were asked to use the Cyber Buch program for reading German texts. The story provided in the program consisted of 762 words. A total of 82 words were annotated in one of the following modes: text only, text coupled with picture, and text coupled with video. Post-tests were administered and students were asked to report the retrieval cue that accompanied each question. The results showed that, first of all, words with text definition accompanied by a picture were recalled better than words accompanied by video annotations. Second, students are likely to look up multiple annotations when they are available to them. Third, the frequency of the look-up

6 behavior does not imply better performance in the vocabulary test. Chun & Plass proposed that this discrepancy could be explained by the fact that that still pictures can be viewed for whatever duration of time the learner wishes. This allows each student to take enough time to develop a mental model of the information, which then serves as a good retrieval cue. In contrast, the videos in the study were usually short. They allowed less time for learners to make associations and store the information in long-term memory. Chun and Plass concluded that, because of these differences between video annotations and picture annotations, the two modes of annotation should not be combined into a composite category of visual annotation but should remain separate categories. Audio Using a hypertext/hypermedia environment for the teaching of second language vocabulary, Svenconis & Kerst (1995) compared learning under four conditions: words presented in a semantic mapping format alone, words presented in a semantic mapping format with audio words presented in lists, and words presented in lists with audio. In spite of the theoretical advantage of semantic mapping, results did not show the semantic format to be more effective for vocabulary learning per se. However, with the addition of the sound factor, semantic mapping was shown to be statistically more effective in helping students retain new vocabulary. Svenconis and Kerst found that audio can be a powerful factor in producing better word retention when it is combined with a second factor, such as semantic mapping. In fact, the effect of audio was so powerful that with the passage of time and subsequent increase in forgetting, the effect of audio or no audio was statistically significant while the method of presentation of the vocabulary (i.e., semantic mapping or lists) was not. Conclusions CALL materials form an integral part of almost every ESL/EFL program. When educators are selecting CALL materials for their program, one way to go about selecting the material is to conduct a needs analysis and then see which CALL materials meet those needs. Numerous checklists (Gaer, 1998; Healey and Johnson, 1997/1998) are available to help with this process. As shown in Table 1, L2 research offers the following important points to consider in choosing CALL programs: (1) picture annotations and video annotations should not be considered together as visual annotations but rather should be treated as two separate features; (2) learners have better retention of L2 vocabulary when they have access to multiple simultaneous modes of annotation; (3) video annotations, though certainly more complex than simple pictures, have not been shown to be consistently more effective than simple pictures or even text annotations; and (4) textual clues presented in L1 (i.e., translations) produce better L2 vocabulary learning than textual clues presented in the L2, at least at the lower proficiency levels and possibly at all levels. [ INSERT TABLE 1 HERE OR NEAR HERE ] However different the results of the CALL studies reviewed here were, all were consistent with the dual-coding theory proposed by Paivio (1986). Paivio asserted the importance of providing both verbal information and visual information. Lessons that combine verbal information with non-verbal information such as pictures are usually remembered better than those that consist of verbal information alone. Thus, providing both verbal and visual information helps learners make referential connections between the two forms of mental representation and helps learners acquire the information more effectively and efficiently. While it has been possible for several years to produce instructional materials with one or more of the features of text, pictures, and video, the time-consuming nature of older methods of production, the scarcity of individuals with the specialized training required in the

7 use of the equipment, and the expense of the equipment itself made production costs prohibitive for all but a few specialized users. However, recent dramatic decreases in the costs of computer and video production equipment, the relative ease of use of new production techniques and software, along with a greater interest in video production as a career have created an environment in which the production of innovative teaching materials is affordable. As a result, new offerings are not only expected but also eagerly anticipated by both students and instructors. Suggestions for Further Study More research needs to be done on all four annotation modes. This is especially true for audio annotations, for very little research exists on this mode. In addition, more work needs to be done on all of the visual modes regarding the use of color. Do color pictures result in more learned vocabulary than do black and white pictures? Do video clips in color produce different learning results than black and white video clips? Finally, does the length of viewing time matter? Does watching a longer video clip about a word result in a higher retention rate? Studies have shown that the learners level of L2 proficiency can influence subsequent vocabulary learning (Folse, 1999; Knight, 1994). Research needs to be done on how the learners level of L2 proficiency interacts with the four annotation types. Do learners with a certain level of L2 proficiency benefit more from one type of annotation or combination of annotation types more than another proficiency level does? Future studies that might yield useful information in this area would also include testing the students to determine whether their "preferred" learning modes are auditory, visual or tactile. Knowing the students preferred learning mode would allow researchers to control for variations caused by these preferences and investigate whether such preferences are significant in language learning. Finally, more research should be done on the other skill areas. How do these annotations types affect ESL grammar, pronunciation, reading, and spelling? Does one type of annotation or combination of annotations appear to have a facilitative effect? Answers to these and other questions will certainly help educators in selecting software that best suits the needs of their students in improving their L2 proficiency.

8 References Al-Seghayer, K. (2001). The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary acquisition: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 5, 202-232. Anderson, L. & Krathwohl, D. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman. Chapelle C. (1990). The discourse of computer-assisted language learning: Toward a context for descriptive research. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 199-255. Chun, D., & Plass, J. (1996a). Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 80, 183-198. Chun, D., & Plass, J. (1996b). Facilitating reading comprehension with multimedia. System, 24, 503-519. Chun, D., & Plass, J. (1997). Research on text comprehension in multimedia environments. Language Learning & Technology, 1, 60-81. Clipperton, R. (1994). Explicit vocabulary instruction in French immersion. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 50, 736749. Dalton, D., Hannafin, M., & Hooper, S. (1989). Effects of individual and cooperative computer-assisted instruction on student performance and attitudes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(2), 15-24. Egbert, J. (January/February 2001). Choosing software for the English language classroom. ESL Magazine, 4, 22. Flaitz, J. (1998). Exit survey of the English language institute. Tampa: University of South Florida. Folse, K. (1999). The effect of type of written practice activity on second language vocabulary retention. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida, Tampa. Fox, G. (September 1998). The Internet: Making it work in the ESL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, IV. Retrieved February 8, 2003, from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Fox-Internet.html Gaer, S. (March 1998). Using software in the adult ESL classroom. Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 418607) Retrieved January 31, 2003, from http://www.cal.org/ncle/digests/SwareQA.htm Gagne, R. (1992). Principles of instructional design. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. Grace, C. (1998). Retention of word meanings inferred from context and sentence-level translations: Implications for the design of beginning-level CALL software. The Modern Language Journal 82, 533-544. Groot, P. (2000). Computer assisted second language vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning & Technology 4, 60-81. Healey, D., & Johnson, N. (Winter 1997/1998). A place to start in selecting software. CAELL Journal 8(1). Retrieved February 8, 2003, from http://www.onid.orst.edu/~healeyd/cj_software_selection.html Henriksen, B. (1999). Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 303-317. Hulstijn, J. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In P. Arnaud & H. Bejoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics (pp. 113-125). London: Macmillan. Hulstijn, J. (1993). When do foreign-language readers look up the meaning of unfamiliar

9 words? The influence of task and learner variables. The Modern Language Journal 77, 139147. Hulstijn, J., Hollander, M., & Greidanus, T. (1996). Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words. The Modern Language Journal, 80, 327339. James, M. (1996). Improving second language reading comprehension: A computer-assisted vocabulary development approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, Manoa. Jolicoeur, K. & Berger, D. (1986). Do we really know what makes educational software effective? A call for empirical research on effectiveness. Educational Technology 26, 7-11. Knight, S. (1994). Dictionary use while reading: The effects on comprehension and vocabulary acquisition for students of different verbal abilities. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 285-299. Kost, C., Foss, P., & Lenzini, J. (1999). Textual and pictorial glosses: Effectiveness on incidental vocabulary growth when reading in a foreign language. Foreign Language Annals 32, 89113. Laufer, B. & Shmueli, K. (1997.) Memorizing new words: Does teaching have anything to do with it? RELC Journal 28, 89-108. Meara, P. (1980). Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language learning. Language Teaching and Linguistics: Abstracts, 13(4), 221-246. Nation, I.S.P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching & learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Owston, R., Murphy, S. & Wideman, H. (1992). The effects of word processing on students' writing quality and revision strategies. Research in the Teaching of English, 26, 249-276. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representation: A dual-coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press. Sherwood, R., Kinzer, C., Hasselbring, T., & Bransford, J. (1987). Macro-contexts for learning: Initial findings and issues. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1(2), 93-108. Svenconis, D. & Kerst, S. (1995). Investigating the teaching of second-language vocabulary through semantic mapping in a hypertext environment. CALICO Journal, 12 (2/3), 3357. Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal 13(2), 7-26. Watanabe, Y. (1998). Input, intake, and retention: Effects of increased processing on incidental learning of foreign language vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 287-307. Yoshii, M. (2000). Second language incidental vocabulary retention: The effect of multimedia annotation types. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida, Tampa.

10 Table 1 Research Results for the Four Modes of Vocabulary Annotation Type of Annotation Study Text: Laufer & Sim, 1985

Findings

Text versus Picture versus Text + Picture:

Text versus Text + Picture versus Text + Video:

Audio:

EFL. Learners often infer incorrect meaning of unknown words even when given adequate context. Hulstijn, 1992 EFL. Learners often infer an incorrect meaning of unknown words; L1 clues better than L2 clues. Hulstijn, 1993 EFL. Learners can infer correct meanings of unknown words when given adequate context. Hulstijn, Hollander & French as a Foreign Language. L1 clues better Greidnaus, 1996 than L2 clues. Laufer & Shmueli, 1997 English as a Foreign Language. L1 clues better than L2 clues. Watanabe, 1997 ESL. L1 clues better than L2 clues. Grace, 1998 . ESL. L1 clues better than L2 clues Kost, Foss & Lenzini, German as a Foreign Language. Compared L1 1999 text, picture, or L1 + Picture. Results: L1 (English) + picture produced best results Yoshii, 2000 ESL. Compared L2 text, picture, or L2 text + picture. Results: L2 text + picture produced best results. Chun & Plass, 1996a German as a Foreign Language. Compared L1 text, L1 text with picture, and L1 text with video. Results: Text with picture was more effective for vocabulary retention text with video. When multiple annotations are available for a word, students are likely to look up multiple annotations. Frequency of look-up did not correlate with vocabulary learning. Al-Seghayer, 2001 ESL. Compared L2 text, L2 text with picture, and L2 text with video. Results: L2 text with video was best, text only was the least effective. Svenconis & Kerst, 1995 ESL. Compared semantic mapping with sound, mapping without sound, word lists with sound, and word lists without sound. Results: No difference between presenting words in semantic mapping and in lists, but when sound was added, semantic mapping resulted in a statistically significant advantage over word lists.

Bio Keith S. Folse, Ph.D. Keith Folse is coordinator of the M.A. TESOL program at the University of Central Florida and is the author of 28 ESL textbooks. He has taught ESL/EFL in the U.S., Japan, Malaysia,

11 Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. He has conducted teacher training workshops in the United States, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Argentina, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan. Ya-Chen Chien Ya-Chen Chien holds her M.A. in TESOL from UCF, where she is currently pursing a Ph.D. in Curriculum & Instruction. She has taught EFL in Taiwan as well as ESL in the U.S. She is currently teaching ESOL Issues for pre-service teachers.